The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked Patanjali Ayurveda whether it has taken all misleading advertisements down from all platforms including social media. The court also asked Patanjali if due diligence been conducted after the affidavits were filed on behalf of the Indian Medical Association.
The court directed Ramdev’s Ayurveda company to file an affidavit within two weeks on whether the request made to social media intermediaries for the removal of advertisements has been fulfilled or not.
A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a plea filed by the IMA alleging a smear campaign by Patanjali against the Covid vaccination drive and modern medicine.
Meanwhile, the Ramdev-led company informed the apex court that it has stopped the sale of the 14 products whose manufacturing licences were suspended in April this year.
The company told the court that it has issued instructions to 5,606 franchise stores to withdraw these products. “Emails have been sent to all the franchise stores and partner stores also to remove the medicines including alerts in social media. But what was done after the intermediaries were informed? There are only handful of intermediaries, not thousands,” the court told Patanjali.
During the hearing, the IMA told the court that an apology on behalf of the Association’s President, for his controversial remarks regarding the Patanjali hearing, has been sent to media and published in IMA’s monthly journal as well as website. The matter has now been posted to August 6.
On April 24, Patanjali Ayurveda co-founders Ramdev and Balkrishna had issued a public apology in newspapers after the Supreme Court, while hearing a contempt case, had asked them whether the size of the apology was of the same size as its advertisements or not.
During a hearing in April, the court had also asked the IMA it to “set its house in order” by taking action on complaints regarding the unethical practices of its members. Following this, IMA President Dr RV Asokan had reportedly slammed the court’s observations in an interview. Patanjali had then filed an application seeking action against Dr Asokan for his “contemptuous” remarks against the court.
On May 7, the court had issued a notice to the IMA President. On May 14, the court reserved its order on the contempt notice issued to Ramdev, Balkrishna and Patanjali Ayurveda Ltd. On the same day, the court had also expressed dissatisfaction with the apology furnished by Dr Asokan for his remarks.
Comments
0 comment